On 8/28/25 3:57 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 28/08/2025 15:49, Vikash Garodia wrote: >>>> >>>> Whether removing will not break any ABI as initial binding enables the IRIS >>>> related code to use video-firmware, now we are removing it. >>>> I believe, removing binding always break ABI ? or is it depend on driver >>>> code not using it ? >>> >>> There is no single user of this, out of tree (I briefly checked) and >>> in-tree, so there is no ABI impact. I am changing the documentation of >>> the ABI, but there is no actual ABI break because impact is 0. >>> >> >> My understanding here is that the interface "video-firmware" is already defined >> in the binding. There could be possible out-of-tree users of it, might not be > > There are no such. I believe the confusion here comes from the requirement that was set out for the iris driver to support existing (venus-supported) platforms without binding alterations Bindings for SM8550 Iris (as in, the hardware block) only came out with the iris driver, so there was no legacy to support in this case Konrad
